Is There Evidence for Creationism? Show it to us.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Science catches itself out and disproves theories constantly. Theories that were once believed to be true based on Science became redundant due to new findings. How anyone can take science as the cold hard fact and believe nothing outside of science is beyond me.

We're learning as we go along. That's what science does. It tests hypotheses, and retests them again and again, to look for the consistency or lack of it.

Yes, of course it updates itself with new developments.

My question is: WHY DOES THAT NOT HAPPEN WITH THE BIBLE?
WHY is it not rewritten to indicate our improved knowledge?

That is why I think it's a crock. It's a piece of antiquated LITERATURE, and that is all.
We don't update Shakespeare, because it STANDS as literature - and is assessed as just that. Still has the same "morals" and "human condition" elements, just like the Greek Tragedies and Comedies. But everyone KNOWS the stories themselves are not "cold hard fact."
They are allegories, or philosphical treatises. Harry Potter, Homer, Ulysses, Hercules, ALL of those tales are classical literature. Hell, Star Wars is also the same story, but FAR more entertaining and memorable. All of those epics (including Dune) are much more akin to the universal truths than the Bible EVER WAS. Good vs bad. Dark vs light.

The Bible is a disconnected anthology of musings by unknown people who did't know the other writers, has no coherence, no plot line worth following, and is in general a jumbled mess. It's no more the "word of God" than Shakespeare's plays, but Shakespeare's plays are INFINITELY better in terms of quality and story-telling.

People who REFUSE to apply that same systematic (scientific) discernment and testing to The Bible are obtuse, stubborn, uneducated, and often (but NOT ALWAYS) vile. The Bible is NOT NON-FICTION.

Hi Spygeek!

Have you heard about sumerian tablets? Their Gods are called Annunaki, coming from the sky. Some experts say that these Gods came from another planet (some say it's Nibiru, others claim they came from another constellation [orion, draco]) looking for gold. Again they are debating on the reason of their need for the ressource. Anyway, the Annunaki started extracting gold with their own workers, who ultimately got mad after their masters. So they got the good idea to create their own workers, intelligent enough to work by themself, but not enough to contest their order. So they took an already existing species (homo erectus or so) and they genetically modified it with their genes. Now then, the sumerian tablets are tricky to decipher cause their communications are quiet different than ours, so there can be errors and bad interpretations of the symbols. Nonetheless that lot of religions have their roots there. I'm not trying to say evolution doesn't exist, but I believe in this version as it's pretty plausible. I link a video here cause he got a better overall explain. I won't go in details cause its mostly in the details that the story differ. For them, i suggest you doing you're research if you are interest in this theory. www.youtube.com...
Have a nice day.

originally posted by: Prezbo369

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
I actually agree with the purpose of that other thread simply because it calls out the hypocrisy of the anti-theist crowd. So many on your side say people are fools for believing in something, yet your side readily admits that your arguments aren't foolproof either. So both creationism & science require faith & hypotheticals to be valid.

Religious faith is believing in something for no good reason (always very a foolish thing to do), accepting a scientific theory is done for very good reasons.

No hypocrisy there i'm afraid....

That's not true at all. I don't even know where you got that false argument. Every single person who follows a religion has their reasons. Most of us have a laundry list of good reasons. You clearly don't know hat you're talking about.

a reply to: Pouilleux

do you have any sources in english? it would make for some great light reading. cant say as i believe in it, but entertainment is entertainment.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Science catches itself out and disproves theories constantly. Theories that were once believed to be true based on Science became redundant due to new findings. How anyone can take science as the cold hard fact and believe nothing outside of science is beyond me. It's made fantastic progress and will continue to do so. But in this time, the progress it makes will remove much of our current understanding of the world. Why on earth Evolution is the cold hard truth just because current science "claims" to support this (even then, it's touch and go) is crazy!

"hey, we were wrong, we are sorry. but here is the right answer and here is how we arrived at it. you are welcome to test it yourself! in fact, we want you to! let us know if you find anything!"

i would take the humility of an honest scholar over the swagger of a con man and his deluded customers any day. and when a board of honest certified experts tells us that evolution has been disproven and shows us the dots and lines, thats when we will listen.

a reply to: 3danimator2014

lmao probably the dumbest thing i ever seen

originally posted by: enlightenedservant
That's not true at all. I don't even know where you got that false argument.

Yeah because religious faith has never meant that........?

Every single person who follows a religion has their reasons. Most of us have a laundry list of good reasons. You clearly don't know hat you're talking about.

Good reasons such as? let me guess.......spooky experiences? you lost your keys and asked god to help you find them and then you 'miraculously' found them?

Are the reasons you posit verifiable and repeatable like the scientific theories you claim require 'faith'? Or do you just expect people to accept/believe them?

To compare the superstitious and baseless claims made by theists with what the scientific method has produced is nothing but folly on your part.

originally posted by: Krazysh0t
a reply to: spygeek

Oh believe me. I was following a similar train of thought when I wrote my thread too. It's just not going to work. The Creationists you are trying to address argue along different rules of debate than most people do. It's impossible to get them to admit their hypocrisies or fallacies.

Evolutionists want to believe that everything will continue along on some "natural path" nature being some system they do not understand and cannot even bother to ask how it started because it is just as insane contemplating it as the GOD GUYS.

Especially they do not see that both "sides" are guaranteed to never know a dam thing about how all of this happened, and they both DONT CARE.

a reply to: Prezbo369

You think science is going to eventually deal with how everything is created out of nothing ??

That happened long ago, they started delving into areas of the mind, and the weaker sects most people couldn't handle it and religions were created from these.

And then the sciences again, around and around we go, make sure nobody knows.

I have yet to see any evolutionists (ones that believe all is from simple matter and we are just figments of a chemical imagination) remain on side with it once they have taken a trip on '___', or caused their own minds to produce a lot of it, SCIENCE wants nothing to do with it....

SCIENCE is a blasphemy of what it should be, just like religion, someone is owning all sides and the people will never know any better.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: Prezbo369

You think science is going to eventually deal with how everything is created out of nothing ??

That happened long ago, they started delving into areas of the mind, and the weaker sects most people couldn't handle it and religions were created from these.

And then the sciences again, around and around we go, make sure nobody knows.

I have yet to see any evolutionists (ones that believe all is from simple matter and we are just figments of a chemical imagination) remain on side with it once they have taken a trip on '___', or caused their own minds to produce a lot of it, SCIENCE wants nothing to do with it....

SCIENCE is a blasphemy of what it should be, just like religion, someone is owning all sides and the people will never know any better.

the exact source and nature of consciousness has yet to be determined via reliable scientific avenues. but believe me, they (our brightest minds and accompanying tools) are working hard on it. they want the answers just as much as we do, if not more. remember, they too are subjects of consciousness and would love to be able to answer your questions definitively, and they deserve the chance to do that honestly and with integrity.

originally posted by: ParasuvO
a reply to: Prezbo369

You think science is going to eventually deal with how everything is created out of nothing ??

That happened long ago, they started delving into areas of the mind, and the weaker sects most people couldn't handle it and religions were created from these.

And then the sciences again, around and around we go, make sure nobody knows.

I have yet to see any evolutionists (ones that believe all is from simple matter and we are just figments of a chemical imagination) remain on side with it once they have taken a trip on '___', or caused their own minds to produce a lot of it, SCIENCE wants nothing to do with it....

SCIENCE is a blasphemy of what it should be, just like religion, someone is owning all sides and the people will never know any better.

What a shocker! you've provided an inaccurate caricature of science with that ridicules summary.
Are you by any chance looking for ocean front property?



Science is inherently self correcting and must be falsifiable, it's nothing like religion. For example, genetics could have completely debunked evolution as a theory by disproving common ancestry. Instead, guess what, it fitted beautifully.

Scientific theories are cool like that, they're built from multiple sources of independent evidence, each one capable of proving the whole thing wrong.

So... if you have any evidence to disprove any of these things, it' would be great to hear from you, otherwise take your ball and go home!

a reply to: TzarChasm

Hehe,

Actually the guy in the video is talking english, but you just have to tap on any search web terms like "annunaki", "sumerian", "nibiru", "origins of religion in mesopotamia", and so on. There's just so much theories and informations out there.

I hope you find what you wanted! But remember that they have difficulties to exactly decipher the tablets, so theories can differ quiet a lot. On this good night!

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Science catches itself out and disproves theories constantly. Theories that were once believed to be true based on Science became redundant due to new findings. How anyone can take science as the cold hard fact and believe nothing outside of science is beyond me.

We're learning as we go along. That's what science does. It tests hypotheses, and retests them again and again, to look for the consistency or lack of it.

Yes, of course it updates itself with new developments.

My question is: WHY DOES THAT NOT HAPPEN WITH THE BIBLE?
WHY is it not rewritten to indicate our improved knowledge?

That is why I think it's a crock. It's a piece of antiquated LITERATURE, and that is all.
We don't update Shakespeare, because it STANDS as literature - and is assessed as just that. Still has the same "morals" and "human condition" elements, just like the Greek Tragedies and Comedies. But everyone KNOWS the stories themselves are not "cold hard fact."
They are allegories, or philosphical treatises. Harry Potter, Homer, Ulysses, Hercules, ALL of those tales are classical literature. Hell, Star Wars is also the same story, but FAR more entertaining and memorable. All of those epics (including Dune) are much more akin to the universal truths than the Bible EVER WAS. Good vs bad. Dark vs light.

The Bible is a disconnected anthology of musings by unknown people who did't know the other writers, has no coherence, no plot line worth following, and is in general a jumbled mess. It's no more the "word of God" than Shakespeare's plays, but Shakespeare's plays are INFINITELY better in terms of quality and story-telling.

People who REFUSE to apply that same systematic (scientific) discernment and testing to The Bible are obtuse, stubborn, uneducated, and often (but NOT ALWAYS) vile. The Bible is NOT NON-FICTION.

You sound horrendously upset. And I have no Idea why.

I love how everyone jumps on the bible the minute anyone disputes Evolution. As if that's the only alternative.

Yes, we are learning. Therefore Evolution (as it is just a theory) can quite possibly get disproved at any time. But yet here we are still stating it's fact because... we're taught it pretty much is. Without knowing for 100% certainty. And even then, it's only fact until we disprove it. Science, in it's nature, is fluid. Why anyone stands up for Evolution as THE ONLY answer is beyond me.

I wouldn't go as far as calling those people names, though.

originally posted by: TzarChasm
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Science catches itself out and disproves theories constantly. Theories that were once believed to be true based on Science became redundant due to new findings. How anyone can take science as the cold hard fact and believe nothing outside of science is beyond me. It's made fantastic progress and will continue to do so. But in this time, the progress it makes will remove much of our current understanding of the world. Why on earth Evolution is the cold hard truth just because current science "claims" to support this (even then, it's touch and go) is crazy!

"hey, we were wrong, we are sorry. but here is the right answer and here is how we arrived at it. you are welcome to test it yourself! in fact, we want you to! let us know if you find anything!"

i would take the humility of an honest scholar over the swagger of a con man and his deluded customers any day. and when a board of honest certified experts tells us that evolution has been disproven and shows us the dots and lines, thats when we will listen.

So when someone disproves other theories (Creationism or any other) you'll listen then. But in the mean time? ....

Also, why is anyone who believes anything other than Evolution a con man?

Test evolution, find me the cold hard facts and show me how nothing could disprove it. Ever. And i'll take it as cold hard fact. Until then, i'll respect it, listen to it and consider it. But not put my faith in it.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

Test evolution, find me the cold hard facts and show me how nothing could disprove it.

If nothing could disprove it, it would not be science.

Unlike "God did it." That cannot be disproven. "God did it" is not science, it is faith.

Therefore Evolution (as it is just a theory)

Ah, one of those "just a theory" guys.
You know that gravity is "just a theory", right?

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MrConspiracy

Test evolution, find me the cold hard facts and show me how nothing could disprove it.

If nothing could disprove it, it would not be science.

Unlike "God did it." That cannot be disproven. "God did it" is not science, it is faith.

Therefore Evolution (as it is just a theory)

Ah, one of those "just a theory" guys.
You know that gravity is "just a theory", right?

Exactly. So why do people go up in arms when someone tries to dispute evolution? If it's open to being disproven why do people believe it as fact and automatically jump to attack religion when it's not always involved to being with?

In terms of Gravity... I can drop something and prove "gravity" exists to make said item fall. Sure, gravity itself might be the theory. But the need for a force to exist for the item to fall isn't.

Evolution is different. Evolution is the theory.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

So why do people go up in arms when someone tries to dispute evolution?

They don't. Not if a rational case is presented. That doesn't seem to happen much though. Mostly what is said is "I ain't no monkey! And neither was my daddy! Show me a case of a bird hatching from a lizard egg!"

Evolution is different. Evolution is the theory.

No. Living things change over time, just as things fall when you drop them. The theory is about how that occurs.

My advice for evidence of Creationism is to go look in a mirror and say.."Hmmmm"

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: MrConspiracy

So why do people go up in arms when someone tries to dispute evolution?

They don't. Not if a rational case is presented. That doesn't seem to happen much though. Mostly what is said is "I ain't no monkey! And neither was my daddy! Show me a case of a bird hatching from a lizard egg!"

Evolution is different. Evolution is the theory.

No. Living things change over time, just as things fall when you drop them. The theory is about how that occurs.

I can drop something. I can't categorically prove we came from another species entirely.

a reply to: MrConspiracy

I can't categorically prove we came from another species entirely.

You don't have to. But you can prove that living things change over time and that those changes add up.
We have observed species change from one to another. From one that can breed with its own to one which no longer can breed with that species. To one which can only breed with others like itself. Through mutation.

Ok, now it's time for you to do this: